Reforming Medical Education Curriculum to Advance Health Research and Evidence-Based Practice

Health research and evidence-based practice (EBP) are essential components of modern medical education, ensuring that graduates can critically appraise literature, make informed clinical decisions  and contribute to the advancement of healthcare knowledge[1,2]. The integration of research and EBP into the medical curriculum equips students with competencies to formulate research questions, conduct studies, interpret findings and apply evidence to clinical practice[3]. Despite recognition of its importance ,in many medical institutes medical curricula historically emphasize theoretical knowledge and clinical skills while offering limited structured research training or practical exposure to EBP[4,5].

 

Curriculum reforms in medical education are increasingly focused on bridging the gaps in research and evidence-based practice (EBP) skills. To achieve this, medical schools are embedding research methodology, critical appraisal skills and EBP principles throughout the undergraduate program[6-9]. This integrated approach aims to equip students with the necessary competencies to apply research findings to real-world clinical scenarios.

 

The impact of these reforms is crucial to determining their effectiveness in enhancing students' research competencies and ability to implement EBP in clinical decision-making[10,11]. By assessing the outcomes of these reforms, medical schools can refine their curricula to  ensure that graduates are equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary to provide high-quality, evidence-based care. To bridge the gaps in research and evidence-based practice (EBP) skills, medical schools are implementing various strategies[12]. These include mandatory research projects that provide hands-on research experiences, allowing students to develop practical skills. Structured EBP modules offer a comprehensive understanding of research principles and methodologies, laying the foundation for evidence-based practice13-15]. Additionally, mentorship programs pair students with experienced researchers and clinicians  provided guidance and support. Furthermore, research activities are being integrated longitudinally alongside clinical training, enabling students to apply research skills in real-world settings and reinforce their learning.

 

The ultimate goal of these reforms is to produce medical graduates who are proficient in applying research evidence to inform their clinical practice who can contribute to the advancement of medical knowledge through research and quality improvement initiatives. By prioritizing research and EBP skills, medical schools can help shape the next generation of healthcare professionals who are equipped to provide patient-centered   evidence-based care. Previous studies have highlighted mixed outcomes, with some reforms improving research knowledge and attitudes, while practical application and sustained evidence-based practice (EBP) utilization often remain limited[16]. Additionally, faculty support, mentorship availability and institutional resources significantly influence the success of curricular innovations. Understanding student and faculty perceptions alongside objective assessments of competencies  provide comprehensive insights into the effectiveness of curriculum reforms and identifies areas requiring further improvement[17-19].

 

This study has emphasis on competency-based medical education and the global need for physicians proficient in research and evidence-based practice (EBP), this study aims to assess the extent to which the current medical curriculum supports health research , evidence-based practice (EBP) and identify gaps in research training, to evaluate the impact of recent curriculum reforms on student knowledge, attitudes,skills.

A total of 80 undergraduate medical students and 25 faculty members participated in the study. The analysis focused on students’ research exposure, research competencies, evidence-based practice (EBP) knowledge and application and perceptions of curriculum reforms, alongside faculty perspectives on curriculum effectiveness and gaps.

 

Fig 1 showed the distribution of the participants involved in the study

 

Among students, 40% (n = 32) reported participation in structured research projects, while 30% (n = 24) had engaged in independent research activities. Self-assessed competency scores showed that 50% (n = 40) felt confident in formulating research questions, 55% (n = 44) in conducting literature searches, and 35% (n = 28) in applying basic statistical methods. Students exposed to recent curriculum reforms reported higher confidence across all research competencies.

 

Table 1: Student Research Exposure and Competencies (n = 80)

*Mean ± SD on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = low competency, 5 = high competency)

 

Knowledge of EBP concepts was reported by 60% (n = 48) of students, while 45% (n = 36) indicated that they had applied EBP principles in clinical decision-making. The mean evidence-based practice (EBP) competency score was 3.5 ± 0.7, reflecting moderate understanding and application among the study.

 

Table 2: Student EBP Knowledge and Application (n = 80)

*Mean ± SD on a 5-point Likert scale

 

Among students, 70% (n = 56) perceived that curriculum reforms had improved their research skills, 65% (n = 52) felt that evidence-based practice (EBP )understanding had been enhanced. Faculty members largely showed  that reforms positively influenced students’ theoretical knowledge of research and EBP, but 60% (n = 15) noted persistent gaps in practical application, mentorship, and integration into clinical rotations.

 

Table 3: Faculty Research Exposure, Competencies, and EBP Knowledge (n = 25)

*Mean ± SD based on a 5-point Likert sc:

 

The findings of this study suggest that while curriculum reforms have led to a moderate improvement in students' research competencies and EBP knowledge, there is still a significant gap in translating this knowledge into practical skills and clinical application. Despite the reforms, students and faculty alike perceive that students lack sufficient hands-on experience and exposure to research and EBP in real-world clinical settings.

 

Table 4 showed the Perceptions of Curriculum Reforms (Students n = 80, Faculty n = 25)

Participant Group	Perceived Improvement in Research Skills	Perceived Improvement in EBP Understanding
Students	56 (70%)	52 (65%)
Faculty	20 (80%)	18 (72%)

 

To address this limitation, there is a pressing need for structured mentorship programs that provide students with guidance and support as they navigate research projects and EBP initiatives. Additionally, incorporating hands-on research opportunities and integrating EBP principles into routine clinical training can help bridge the gap between theory and practice. By doing so, medical institutes can equip students with the practical skills and confidence needed to apply EBP in clinical decision-making, ultimately enhancing patient care and outcomes.

This study provides important insights into the current status of research training and EBP integration within the medical curriculum and highlights the impact of recent curriculum reforms. The findings demonstrate that while structured reforms have moderately improved students’ research knowledge, attitudes, and skills, there are still notable gaps remaining in formal research training and guided application of EBP[20].

 

Our quantitative results align with broader evidence indicating that EBP education enhances competencies when integrated longitudinally into medical programs. Studies suggest that curricula incorporating explicit EBP principles and longitudinal research opportunities consistently produce graduates who are better prepared to integrate research evidence into clinical decisions.

 

However, systematic reviews of EBP teaching underscore limitations in how EBP is currently delivered across health professions, conventional educational strategies often produce modest improvements in competency unless supported by interdisciplinary and clinically embedded interventions[21,22]. This supports our qualitative findings where students reported that while theoretical components of research and EBP were present, hands‑on application, mentorship and clinical integration were insufficient, a gap that echoes global trends in medical education reform needs.

 

Faculty perceptions also mirrored this concern, with many identifying structural barriers such as limited protected time for research supervision, inadequate faculty development in EBP teaching and uneven institutional support[23-25]. Such barriers have been documented in a range of health education settings, where the effectiveness of EBP and research curricula heavily depends on faculty expertise and stable infrastructure for sustained implementation.

 

Importantly, this study’s mixed‑methods approach provided a more comprehensive understanding than either quantitative or qualitative data alone. Quantitative measures established the level of competencies and attitudes, while qualitative insights clarified why certain reforms may fall short in bridging theory and practice[26,27]. Together, these findings suggest that curriculum reforms must move beyond standalone research modules and embed longitudinal, mentored, and clinically contextualized research and EBP experiences to produce the intended competencies[28].

 

The study showed that   recent curriculum reforms have contributed positively to strengthening undergraduate medical students’ research capacity and understanding of evidence-based practice (EBP). Moderate improvements were observed in research knowledge, literature search skills, formulation of research questions, and conceptual understanding of EBP

The study  concluded  that  curricular innovations enhanced theoretical competencies and awareness of research principles. However, significant gaps persist in practical application, hands-on research exposure, statistical skills, structured mentorship and integration of EBP within clinical rotations. While curriculum restructuring is a critical step toward competency-based medical education, sustainable impact requires longitudinal integration of research training, structured mentorship programs, protected faculty support, and clinically embedded EBP experiences.

 

Recommendations

Based on the findings, it is recommended that medical curricula incorporate longitudinal, competency-based research training integrated throughout clinical years. Structured mentorship programs should be strengthened to provide continuous guidance and supervision. Increasing hands-on research opportunities, protected time for faculty supervision, and practical EBP application during clinical rotations are essential to bridge the theory–practice gap.

 

Faculty development programs focusing on research supervision and EBP teaching should also be implemented. Future studies should employ multi-institutional designs with larger sample sizes and include objective measures of competency to further validate the impact of curriculum reforms.

1.      Hays R: Including health promotion and illness prevention in medical education: a progress report. Med Educ. 2022, 52:68-77. 10.1111/medu.13389

2.      Frost K, Edelhäuser F, Hofmann M, Tauschel D, Lutz G: History and development of medical studies at the University of Witten/Herdecke - an example of "continuous reform". GMS J Med Educ. 2019, 36:Doc61. 10.3205/zma001269

3.      Nair M, Fellmeth G: Current efforts in medical education to incorporate national health priorities. Med Educ. 2018, 52:24-33. 10.1111/medu.13395

4.      Kiessling C, Mennigen F, Schulte H, Schwarz L, Lutz G: Communicative competencies anchored longitudinally - the curriculum "personal and professional development" in the model study programme in undergraduate medical education at the University of Witten/Herdecke. GMS J Med Educ. 2021, 38:Doc57. 10.3205/zma001453

5.      Mortaz Hejri S, Mirzazadeh A, Khabaz Mafinejad M, Alizadeh M, Saleh N, Gandomkar R, Jalili M: A decade of reform in medical education: experiences and challenges at Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Med Teach. 2018, 40:472-80. 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1438591

6.      Skochelak SE, Lomis KD, Andrews JS, Hammoud MM, Mejicano GC, Byerley J: Realizing the vision of the Lancet Commission on education of health professionals for the 21st century: transforming medical education through the accelerating change in Medical Education Consortium. Med Teach. 2021, 43:S1-6. 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1935833

7.      Arantes M, Andrade JP, Barbosa J, Ferreira MA: Curricular changes: the impact on medical students knowledge of neuroanatomy. BMC Med Educ. 2020, 20:20. 10.1186/s12909-019-1907-1

8.      Dickinson BL, Gibson K, VanDerKolk K, et al.: "It is this very knowledge that makes us doctors": an applied thematic analysis of how medical students perceive the relevance of biomedical science knowledge to clinical medicine. BMC Med Educ. 2020, 20:356. 10.1186/s12909-020-02251-w

9.      Hopkins R, Pratt D, Bowen JL, Regehr G: Integrating basic science without integrating basic scientists: reconsidering the place of individual teachers in curriculum reform. Acad Med. 2019, 90:149-53.

10.   Khalil MK, Giannaris EL, Lee V, Baatar D, Richter S, Johansen KS, Mishall PL: Integration of clinical anatomical sciences in medical education: design, development and implementation strategies. Clin Anat. 2021, 34:785-93. 10.1002/ca.23736

11.   Shehnaz SI: A five year longitudinal study of the educational environment in a newly integrated medical curriculum. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2019, 19:e335-44. 10.18295/squmj.2019.19.04.009

12.   Abraham RR, Alele F, Kamath U, et al.: Assessment for learning: a needs analysis study using formative assessment to evaluate the need for curriculum reform in basic sciences. Adv Physiol Educ. 2018, 42:482-6. 10.1152/advan.00093.2018

13.   Huang L, Cai Q, Cheng L, et al.: Analysis of curricular reform practices at Chinese medical schools. Teach Learn Med. 2014, 26:412-9. 10.1080/10401334.2014.910463

14.   Cavuoto Petrizzo M, Barilla-LaBarca ML, Lim YS, Jongco AM, Cassara M, Anglim J, Stern JN: Utilization of high-fidelity simulation to address challenges with the basic science immunology education of preclinical medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2019, 19:352. 10.1186/s12909-019-1786-5

15.   Kushdilian MV, Ladd LM, Gunderman RB: Radiology in the study of bone physiology. Acad Radiol. 2016, 23:1298-308. 10.1016/j.acra.2016.06.001

16.   Thomas S, Pai N, Dawes K, Wilson C, Williams V: Updating medical school psychiatry curricula to meet projected mental health needs. Australas Psychiatry. 2013, 21:578-82. 10.1177/1039856213500092

17.   Hanson ER, Gantwerker EA, Chang DA, Nagpal AS: To teach or not to teach? Assessing medical school faculty motivation to teach in the era of curriculum reform. BMC Med Educ. 2022, 22:363. 10.1186/s12909-022-03416-5

18.   Peine A, Kabino K, Spreckelsen C: Self-directed learning can outperform direct instruction in the course of a modern German medical curriculum - results of a mixed methods trial. BMC Med Educ. 2016, 16:158. 10.1186/s12909-016-0679-0

19.   Zahid MA, Varghese R, Mohammed AM, Ayed AK: Comparison of the problem based learning-driven with the traditional didactic-lecture-based curricula. Int J Med Educ. 2016, 7:181-7. 10.5116/ijme.5749.80f5

20.   Battat R, Jhonson M, Wiseblatt L, et al.: The Haiti medical education project: development and analysis of a competency based continuing medical education course in Haiti through distance learning. BMC Med Educ. 2016, 16:275. 10.1186/s12909-016-0795-x

21.   Holmboe ES, Sherbino J, Englander R, Snell L, Frank JR: A call to action: the controversy of and rationale for competency-based medical education. Med Teach. 2017, 39:574-81. 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1315067

22.   Crossley JG: Addressing learner disorientation: give them a roadmap. Med Teach. 2014, 36:685-91. 10.3109/0142159X.2014.889813

23.   Karami M, Hashemi N, van Merrienboer J: Medical educators' beliefs about learning goals, teaching, and assessment in the context of curriculum changes: a qualitative study conducted at an Iranian medical school. BMC Med Educ. 2021, 21:446. 10.1186/s12909-021-02878-3

24.   Ding YM, Shen WD, Yang J, He Y, Wang LL, Zhang X: Application of problem-based self-designed experiments in physiology laboratory teaching. Adv Physiol Educ. 2023, 47:243-50. 10.1152/advan.00196.2022

25.   Reis S: Curriculum reform: why? What? How? And how will we know it works? Isr J Health Policy Res. 2018, 7:30. 10.1186/s13584-018-0221-4

26.   Istas K, Paolo AM, Berardo BA, et al.: On the origins of perceptions: student perceptions of active learning and their implications for educational reform. Teach Learn Med. 2019, 28:362-6. 10.1080/10401334.2016.1217224

27.   Martimianakis MA, Michalec B, Lam J, Cartmill C, Taylor JS, Hafferty FW: Humanism, the hidden curriculum, and educational reform: a scoping review and thematic analysis. Acad Med. 2015, 90:S5-13. 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000894

28.   Kulasegaram K, Mylopoulos M, Tonin P, et al.: The alignment imperative in curriculum renewal. Med Teach. 2018, 40:443-8.